The Government has failed in its efforts to reform the regulation of the legal sector by concentrating on advertising restrictions rather than competition, according to research contained within the latest ESRI quarterly commentary.
In a paper on regulatory reform in the solicitor profession, Prof Edward Shinnick of University College, Cork, argues that the Government's concentration on advertising regulations for solicitors has meant it has ignored "the more substantial issue" of competition in legal services, such as conveyancing and personal injury claims. Prof Shinnick suggests that up to two-thirds of solicitors' work could be sheltered from competitive influences.
Describing the Law Society as "a powerful agency", Prof Shinnick says its dual role of representing and policing solicitors should be abolished "due to an inherent conflict of interest".
A new regulator should be established, he argues.
He calls for a rigorous debate on the merits of regulatory reform and argues that all such reform should be based on a cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysts.
Public interest in regulatory reform is essential, according to Prof Shinnick.
A strong enforcement of competition policy is also required, he advises. He says the Competition Authority should consider the restrictions on entry and practice that apply to the profession and decide on their justification.
He expresses surprise at the Competition Authority's decision to look at barristers and solicitors last in its current review of competition in the professions.
"Evidence in other countries shows that reducing entry restrictions and allowing more competition from within the profession can reduce fees," Prof Shinnick writes.
